Wednesday, October 14, 2015

Is There an Exit Ramp Off the Energy Highway?

The following opinion piece, written by Will Yandik, deputy supervisor of the Town of Livingston, appeared as a "My View" in theRegister-Starthis morning. The text was also provided to Gossips this morning by Farmers and Families of Livington. It is highly recommended reading.

Dear Cuomo--Is There an Exit Ramp Off the Energy Highway?

For two years now we have pushed back against Gov. Cuomo’s
Energy Highway, a plan to build 153 miles of new transmission lines from
central NY through Columbia and Dutchess counties, because it could offer no
proven need or value. What has become clear to us this month is that the Public
Service Commission (PSC), the state regulatory agency charged with protecting
the public’s interests on utility matters, recommends advancing a project that will
harm Hudson Valley landowners and businesses and drain the pockets of
ratepayers statewide.

The
original purpose of the Energy Highway was to relieve congestion on the
region’s AC transmission lines for the 2-3 summer days when those lines are
busy because of heavy air conditioner use downstate. Using publicly awarded
money called intervenor funds, we hired London Economics International, a
widely respected firm to vet the PSC’s assumptions. The independent firm and
other consultants found conclusively that congestion on the grid is rapidly
declining as electricity markets shift. Asking ratepayers to fork over $1+
billion to solve a problem that does not exist is economic madness.

We eagerly
expected to present these findings at a technical conference that we worked
hard to establish with PSC staff. However, the PSC has informed us that this
conference will not be part of the formal record and before they heard or
reviewed one detail of our reports, steamrolled a staff recommendation on Sept.
22 that gives the green light to one of the most expensive and impactful set of
transmission projects.

Despite
mollifying comments from PSC public relations staff, such actions send a clear
signal to our communities that our input is not valued and it suggests that our
experts never had a chance of influencing PSC staff. The conference amounts to
a pat on the head.

The PSC in
its staff recommendation categorically removed several compromises that both the
PSC and community groups agreed had minimal impacts but could deliver the
additional transmission capacity sought by the state. Underground line solutions
advanced by Boundless Energy, for example, and alternatives such as reconductoring
(retrofitting the same towers and installing more modern wires) were flatly
rejected.

PSC staff can
no longer make a credible argument that new transmission towers will improve
congestion or lower ratepayers costs, and so they have invoked a completely new
rationale for the project—one based on “public policy,” which is an Albany way
of providing the utilities a blank check. The take away? We need new towers for
whatever reason the PSC says so.

How could
the same PSC that has worked with community groups in Ghent to find a
compromise on transmission plans there, so completely shut out meaningful
public input on the Energy Highway? Our sources close to the PSC routinely call
this particular project “political,” by which we can only infer that somewhere it
involves a foul trail of money and influence.

If the PSC changes
the rationale for the Energy Highway midstream, shuts out innovative
alternatives from competing developers and bars unflattering testimony from the
record, how can we expect this taxpayer-supported agency to advocate for us?

It is a cop
out for our governor to claim that the PSC is an independent body and makes its
own decisions. He appointed many of them and the buck stops on his desk. If
Cuomo, as oft claimed, wishes to battle corruption and waste in this state, he
can start with this project and demand its termination until the ratepayers of
New York can be assured that we have a regulatory agency that follows the rules
and serves the people.

Want to Know . . .

Follow by Email

About The Gossips of Rivertown

This blog takes its name from the 1850 novel by Hudson author Alice B. Neal. The original Gossips of Rivertown cast a gimlet eye on Hudson society in the mid-19th century. More than a century and a half later, the new Gossips carries on the spirit of the original, but in a different genre and with a different focus.